If the text is all mangled, try using an alternate browser. Firefox couldn't read it, but IE could.

I also saved the whole thing to disk.

Trying to decipher aged old pages of tiny printed Devanagari which all blurs together or is faded in parts is half the battle of my Sanskrit class! This romanized version is like a gift from a Bodhisattva.

Huifeng wrote:Thanks for this. Actually, I knew this site a while back, but forgot about it. I'm not just about to convert those 9 htmls into a nice fat PDF document. hehe.

Besides maybe you, me and Astus, I don't imagine anyone else here can make much use of it, but then who knows maybe others will too.

Like I said, 'tis a Bodhisattva-sent thing it is. Trying to decipher poorly printed devanagari (in an older font too!) is painful. Half the battle of my course would have been decoding the photocopy of the devanagari.

Having Paramartha's and Xuanzang's translations as well as Poussin's will also make going through the Sanskrit easier.

It is also interesting to compare Xuanzang's choice of vocabulary against the original Sanskrit. This is something I might eventually devote much time and research to in the distant future.

Huseng wrote:It is also interesting to compare Xuanzang's choice of vocabulary against the original Sanskrit.

It may help to get out of the habit of thinking of the Sanskrit as "the original". It is quite possible that both Paramartha's and Xuanzang's versions were older than the Sanskrit manuscripts we have in the present day and age. As for Xuanzang's vocab, it is pretty standard. Much can be learnt from his translations, which, through his choice of terminology in Chinese, can in a sense act as a commentary of sorts.

Huseng wrote:It is also interesting to compare Xuanzang's choice of vocabulary against the original Sanskrit.

It may help to get out of the habit of thinking of the Sanskrit as "the original". It is quite possible that both Paramartha's and Xuanzang's versions were older than the Sanskrit manuscripts we have in the present day and age. As for Xuanzang's vocab, it is pretty standard. Much can be learnt from his translations, which, through his choice of terminology in Chinese, can in a sense act as a commentary of sorts.

It is also possible they were not even translating Sanskrit.

Well, in the case of Xuanzang I think it is probably Sanskrit he was working with, but Paramartha might have been translating a Prakrit.

That I'm sure would be a worthy study to be undertaken if it already hasn't been.